@MyBurningEars N A M Roger's account of The Georgian Navy which covered the 18th Century suggested that printed recall notices were used, and enough of the crew were able to read them. Such notices were a comparatively effective way of communication.
That's very interesting. Wonder if any of them wrote up their memoirs. By the 19th century there's certainly some interesting material (not just from the navy, but also e.g. on whaling).
Sadly as a witness he couldn't remember much about the incident ... except that he was very concerned for the health of Booth, who had jumped off the balcony and hurt his leg. He hadn't realised that the president had been shot.
Thanks for that. There's a rather funny one a few pages in: "Teen-age gangs: a great reporter reveals the truth about girl gangs and how they co-operate with the boys".
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.
I think it's based on a series of marriages between teens and people in their late 80s.
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.
I think it's based on a series of marriages between teens and people in their late 80s.
It would have to be that for the sums to work. But then it is a cheat, as the strong tacit implication is that the lady in question is offering some first hand experience, i.e. that she knew her first husband's first wife's first husband, which she clearly could not have.
@BBCNormanS: Scotland First Minister @NicolaSturgeon writes to PM demanding re-think over "peverse" decision to scrap wind farm subsidies
Given that these subsidies are one of the very few benefits Scotland gets from the National Infrastructure Plan (cost to Scotland over £3bn per annum, benefit less than £200m per annum), it is indeed perverse.
Another own goal for Cameron.
And terrible news for consumers facing even more high cost electric reliance on nuclear in future instead of cheap and getting cheaper wind power.
If the subsidies are costing Scotland net £2.8bn, why is it an own goal for him to scrap them?
The National Infrastructure Plan costs Scotland £3bn. This is substantially more than wind subsidies. Wind subsidies are one of the very few ways Scotland gets even than shabby £200m back.
So how do you think EU finances work ? Take from the wealthy Scottish nation and redistribute in poor southern Europe?
There are anti-science views on both sides of the political spectrum. The religious right has scientifically-unsound objections to evolution and research on stem cells; the eco-left has scientifically-unsound objections to GMOs, genetic engineering and vaccination.
Up there with the all time stupidest political decisions. To throw away their best presenter and the person who produced a coherent manifesto. Madness. I hope after a break, the Conservatives are able to attract her back.
I only caught a few minutes of the DP interview earlier, and she was quite good but, perhaps, a little too forthrightly truthful in answers to questions.
They most certainly are, in practice as well as in most international legal definitions:
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines child as "a human being below the age of 18 years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".
Comments
Things haven't changed much in 61 years ...
Let's see. 1920 was 262 years after Cromwell's death. Say she was 110 at the time, takes us back to 1810. Say her husband was 40 years older than her, 1770. Say his wife was 40 years older than him, 1730. And her husband was 40 years older than her, 1690. Still doesn't get the birth of the oldest within 30 years of Cromwell's death in 1658. Hmm.
PB constitutional lawyers?
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/passage-bill/commons/coms-consideration-of-amendments/
http://health.spectator.co.uk/roll-of-shame-mps-who-back-homeopathy-fan-david-tredinnick-for-chair-of-commons-health-committee/
Quite a few right wingers on that list. Is there a correlation between right wing politicians and anti-science beliefs such as belief in homeopathy and climate change scepticism?
But what is a medical doctor, Dr Poulter, doing on that list
http://www.kmdvalg.dk/fv/2015/F702.htm
New Thread